So I was a bit skeptical as I hadn't heard many reviews, and the ones I heard were "slow and boring". I noticed Danny Devito was a producer as well, so I had to see it. I think this movie perfectly describes what life will be like during the transition from "free form babies" to "genetically perfected babies". It's going to happen, and the ensuing prejudice will hurt many. I ask this: Do you think it will be fair to exclude genetically imperfect humans from the most perilous and challenging careers or should they have a chance to prove themselves (a sort of affirmative action)?

I'm glad they didn't feel the need to change every element of our current technology. Still had elevators, not transporters, used fingerprints rather than ocular scans for most access ports. Think it made the movie more terrifying that this is a possibility, and not in the far future.

right. I hate how most "sci-fi" movies that come out are really just action/fantasy movies that exploit sci-fi visuals with no regard for what science fiction stands for. Gattaca, Blade Runner, 2001, original Solaris and a few others are some of the only films that really convey that future/consequence-conscious feeling that defines science fiction. Sci-Fi is IMO a truly great thing, and Hollywood sells it short time and time again. But not with Gattaca...

Jude Law almost manages to outshine the star. I watched it a couple of days ago when I noticed it popped up on netflix streaming. I enjoyed it in the theater and I think it still holds up. Uma Thurman does not hurt this movie.

You know, I hear this repeated so often. I saw the movie once, when it was originally in theaters. I barely remember anything about it, have no strong opinion of it, and have never had the urge to see it again. But so many people rave about it, maybe I should give it another try.

You must be in the right frame of mind. If you want a fast paced sci fi movie Total Recall is it. Gattaca actually made me tear up a little when the family bonds come to light to defeat the cold world of tomorrow.

I usually don't like what most people would consider "fast paced sci fi." My taste in fantasy tends toward the introspective. Movies like The Fountain and Love and Upstream Color are at the very top of my all-time favorites list. But for whatever reason, Gattaca just didn't grab me.

I didn't know that. Thanks! I've seen it, but it's been awhile, and might give it go today if it's on Netflix. I just remember it made me paranoid as hell after watching it, and as an ent, that's not ideal.

I loved this movie back in the day; great cinematography and set design. Futurustic 50s all the way. But I've always felt the central premise was hope that the power of the human will and an individual's focused ambition can overcome even the most authoritarian deterministic systems. It's as much a story about free will as it is about class equality and institutionalized medicine.

Yeah, I see much more retaliation from grassroots orgs, including fundamentalists and naturalists. I doubt we go willingly, but it may be necessary to prevent mass extinction from overpopulation. But if we thought there was unfairness in the workforce and other institutions now, we ain't seen nothin' yet.

this movie caught me so off guard. it was in the last few days of school and they were just playing random movies in classes. someone brought it and a lot of people didnt pay attention at first. I didn't think much of it at first and i just became so invested in the movie that by the end i loved it and i had no idea what the movie was even called.

yea, it's the county building that has all the courts, sheriffs dept, and other assorted bureaucratic offices. The building design is awesome but the parking is horrendous and confusing. Fuck that parking lot.

I thought this was also a very gorgeous film. Too bad it had to be released the same year a certain sinking ship took all the attention. I found Gattaca to be intriguing, thoughtful, and very literary.

I knew the film when Hulu decided to let the users watch it freely for limited time several years ago. The movie strikes familiar tone since the apartment building was shot at the college I went into. My major was also related to what Jerome does.

sweet! I wanted to be an astronaut when I was a kid..even went to spacecamp in Huntsville. I now realize I'm nowhere near smart enough, but love anything to do with space exploration. My only hope is to marry a rich Russian who can buy me a spot on the tourist shuttle.

I never knew Danny Devito was a producer, that's quite interesting actually. I think my favorite part involved the solar farm and electric cars because it showed humanity seeming to finally move past fossil fuels.

As for your question, it's been done to death, and I don't think you really understand any of the concepts you are asking about. There's no way to define "genetically imperfect" as a large portion of our health is also based on upbringing and environment. I believe it's stated on wikipedia article for Gattaca, but NASA already filters out astronauts based on things such as risk for heart attack, physical health, etc. Allowing "genetically imperfect" people to do the same jobs as genetically perfect people isn't "Affirmative Action", it's just a normal playing field. To give them favored status for those jobs would be affirmative action. To keep them from doing so based just on their genes would be discrimination.

They wouldnt compete for the same jobs. After one generation the genetically enhanced would hold all positions due to them completely outclassing normal people. Ethan hawks brother wasnt that great of a genetic human thats why he was working withe police who were mostly all old guys most likely not modified. The one line that shows the upper limit of genetic capability was..."not one error in a million keystrokes."...even though ethan hawk wasnt genetically enhanced. The point of the piano recital was to show the future of genetech where they were no longer just trying to make better humans but something more.

Fun fact, having six fingers is actually genetically dominant! So you're saying the entire world's workforce is replaced by genetically enhanced people in just one generation? I don't buy it. Gattaca is a good example not of why we shouldn't do genetic enhancement (think of all the parents that would like to have Tay-Sachs removed from their future children) but why genetic privacy laws would be much better.

Yes because every baron of industry, person of power, leader of the world, and person earning over 150k (enough to place you in the top 3% of US earners) has been replaced by people who have taken Kaplan courses or had a tiger mom or some other BS like that.

From NASA: Seems like Gattaca has much stricter regs than we do now. I think you need to read up on this.

"Astronaut Candidate (Non-Piloting background)

Bachelor’s degree from an accredited institution in engineering, biological science, physical science, or mathematics. Quality of academic preparation is important.

Degree must be followed by at least 3 years of related, progressively responsible, professional experience or at least 1,000 pilot-in-command time in jet aircraft. An advanced degree is desirable and may be substituted for experience as follows: master’s degree = 1 year of experience, doctoral degree = 3 years of experience. Teaching experience, including experience at the K - 12 levels, is considered to be qualifying experience for the Astronaut Candidate position; therefore, educators are encouraged to apply.

Ability to pass the NASA long-duration space flight physical, which includes the following specific requirements:

Distant and near visual acuity: Must be correctable to 20/20, each eye

The refractive surgical procedures of the eye, PRK and LASIK, are allowed, providing at least 1 year has passed since the date of the procedure with no permanent adverse after effects. For those applicants under final consideration, an operative report on the surgical procedure will be requested.
Blood pressure not to exceed 140/90 measured in a sitting position

There was a particularly interesting bit that was cut from Gattaca where a woman was being reassured her future baby son was destined/designed to be interested in girls, not boys.

If we ever get to that point, I'd expect a lot of pushback. You're talking about facilitating a genocide of certain groups of people. Understandably, nobody likes the notion that they're regarded as undesirable and need to be eliminated from future generations. (This has already happened with Down's syndrome kids to a certain extent, but the intellectually disabled can't speak up for themselves.)

How is that redefining genocide? It's the textbook definition of genocide: the deliberate destruction of a group of people. Or would the Nazis have been clear of genocide if they'd just sterilized all the Jews instead?

Thanks for confirming that you straight people would kill us all off in an instant if you got the chance, by the way.

This is why I'm against abortion, because I know what you people are going to do as soon as you figure out what makes people gay. Just remember: we can play that game too.

Also, fuck off with "LGBT". I've got nothing to do with trannies. They're fucked in the head.

No genocide is the wiping out of an existing group of people. Correcting a genetic/in vitro mistake isn't the same thing. It's no different than correcting for dow syndrome or any other genetic abnormality.

Thanks for confirming that you straight people would kill us all off in an instant if you got the chance, by the way.

quit being dramatic I have no feelings for gay people one way or the other and have been supportive my entire life. I'm simply stating what the public will do.

because I know what you people are going to do as soon as you figure out what makes people gay.

We have a pretty good idea what makes people gay already. It's a combination of a genetic mutation and an in vitro chemical change in the mother connected to high and constant levels of stress. This is why they think there were greater rates of homosexuality in ancient civilizations. We are not close to "solving" it. But we are close to genetically corrected and selective babies and you can guarantee that correcting for homosexuality will be at the top of consumer demand.

Also, fuck off with "LGBT". I've got nothing to do with trannies. They're fucked in the head.

I don't agree. I think anyone is entitled to be whoever they want to be. If person X doesn't want their life dictated to them , they can't dictate life to anyone else. Equality and all that shit.

Who says it's a mistake? Nature doesn't do teleology. Is being left handed a mistake?

I have no feelings for gay people one way or the other

Other than thinking being gay is a mistake that needs to be "corrected" by wiping gay people off the planet?

We have a pretty good idea what makes people gay already. It's a combination of a genetic mutation and an in vitro chemical change in the mother connected by high and constant levels of stress.

Horseshit. No evidence for this at all.

This is why they think there were greater rates of homosexuality in ancient civilizations.

Horseshit. Some civilizations were more anti-gay than others, is all.

you can guarantee that correcting for homosexuality will be at the top of consumer demand.

I do agree with that, because, like you, almost all straight people want to wipe gays out.

There are a number of things that we can do in response to ensure that we survive. I hope we never figure out what makes people gay, and I hope any such technology is banned if it is discovered, but otherwise we'll have to do whatever we can to survive as a group.

I think anyone is entitled to be whoever they want to be.

I disagree. If you have a cock, you aren't entitled to be a woman because of your "feels". That's just ridiculous. And I certainly don't want to be associated with these people.

Why? Why even bother surviving? If you can ensure future generations are perfect specimens then acting in opposition would only ever be irrational. The rational path would be to create a universally perfect species.

Oh i wasn't aware of that scene! Damn that just adds so much to the general idea of the movie IMO, but maybe it would have taken away from the protagonists problem?

I mean, China-though the policy was necessary-saw the results with the undesirable, girls, being killed more often. Yeah, we won't be actively slaughtered (probably), but isn't reducing variability a problem in itself?

I don't care how gay a kid is, they can turn into a successful functioning adult member of society.

Somebody who is mentally handicapped would be restricted to menial jobs and possibly a lifetime dependency on their parents for care.

What if mom and dad don't want to give up their lives for their special needs child? The child becomes a burden on the state and taxpayers. Nursing homes and long-term care facilities aren't paid for by good intentions and smiles.

Down Syndrome is a trait we can predict that is thought of as undesirable by most of society. Given the chance to abort Down's kids, most parents have done it.

Homosexuality is a trait we can't yet predict that is thought of as undesirable by most of society. Even most liberal parents would probably prefer their kid to be straight. Given the chance to abort gay kids, I believe many, if not most, parents would do it.

So yes, in this sense, we can compare these things. The reason these traits are thought of as undesirable is very different, of course. But justifiability doesn't come into this argument. It's simply about what parents will do if they know their kid will have certain traits they find undesirable.

It comes down to the tricky question of whether parents should be able to shape their child absolutely as they want. You've got a tension between reproductive autonomy and the interest of having diversity, gender balance, etc.

Well, albeit abrupt, he has a point. Gattaca is appreciated by a lot of people. There is many more people who will say that's a good movie than the contrary.

Your presentation didn't help either. "I saw some reviews and they were saying it was slow and boring". Well, it is indeed relatively slow, but slow doesn't mean bad. Not everything is Terminator or the Fifth Element. I guess you just recall the bad reviews over the good ones, because some research would have give you the opposite of the spectrum. As for Danny DeVito producing it, it is not that much relevant, especially since it's quite far from his kind of cinema good or bad review.

So, his message was bad, true, but the way you presented thing as you discovered a gem was a bit strange too.

One thing I've always wondered about this movie. When Vincent returns to Earth, he can't possibly keep up his deception indefinitely. Supposing he gets rumbled, what would the consequences be? Would he be allowed to keep working at Gattaca? Would get done for fraud? Or would it all be hushed up because he's basically undermined the system by achieving more than he was supposed to. Other "invalids" might be emboldened by his achievements and attempt rise above their stations.

Two things about this. Jude law filled a freezer for just such this occassion. Which was a nice sentiment. But what the doctor did was change the system profile for vincents real blood ensuring he never needed it.

Nope didn't like it at all, the message I got from it seems so selfish. You are ill fit for your dream job, what do you do? Get a job in a position where you can contribute to the greatness that you dreamed of? No you cheat to get your way and risk other peoples lives in doing so.

Hmmm didn't think of it this way. Definitely a new perspective. I saw it more as a symbiotic relationship between the two main male actors. They each needed something, so to make the most of their lives, used each other to reach their goals.